Boyd Matheson: Curing our contempt

"practice warm-heartedness. This is not to say that the answer to what ails
our nation, our communities or personal relationships is a big old group hug
"

I agree wholeheartedly - while being civil won't help fix
everything it will make it so we CAN work towards fixing things. Let's
first build a decent shelter so we can have the necessary conversations.
Otherwise, the storm could destroy our nation.

I helped to organize a
Constitution Rally just a week ago where we gave an example of how people from
differing viewpoints can agree that the Constitution gives us all a voice, and
government a great framework. Let's be civil and figure things out
together.

JoeCapitalist2Orem, UT

May 18, 2017 9:41 a.m.

Daedalus, Stephen: "Democrats do not control the U.S. Senate and House of
Representatives, and are not the party that nominated the unfit man is now
precariously and temporarily perched atop the Executive Branch."

Right now that is the case, but in 2009 it was different. The Democrats were
firmly in control of both houses of Congress and had just elected a far-left
president from their party. They did NOTHING to try and stem that power shift
farther to the left. In fact, they accelerated it, by pushing every far-left
agenda item Obama put forward. There is a reason why the voters have thrown many
of them out of office on election day.

The same may happen to the GOP
in future elections if they follow the Dems example.

Tyler D:
"Now finally after decades of “playing by the rules” (and
attitude almost totally absent on the Right) Democrats are beginning to wade
into swamp..."

Give me a break. Democrats have never 'played
by the rules' unless they made the rules to suit themselves. They are neck
deep in the swamp and have been forever. Try taking a look in that mirror
yourself.

cavetrollSANDY, UT

May 18, 2017 9:22 a.m.

@ 2 Bits

" I wonder what my liberal friends who attack people
(especially Republicans in general) with such contempt and bad stereotypes, feel
about what he said about contempt.I know my Democrat friends and Liberal
Friends and Progressive friends are just as "good" as I am. But I
don't get the same feeling back from them. They seem to feel superior, and
full of contempt for people who don't agree with them
(politically)."

There are more than a few Conservatives on here
who also attack people with stereotypes and hatred. Calling a person a
"snowflake" is just one example. Some of the liberal leaning people also
don't get the feeling of being "good." There are many examples from
both sides of the political discussion where they demean the other side. All
parties need to step back and take a long look in the mirror.

Daedalus, StephenARVADA, CO

May 17, 2017 12:27 p.m.

@JoeCapitalist: "...And yet not a word about Democrats and liberals taking
back their party and power"

Correct.

Do you want to
make a guess as to why that is?

Not a trick question.

Democrats do not control the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, and are
not the party that nominated the unfit man is now precariously and temporarily
perched atop the Executive Branch.

200 "radical leftists" who
yell and scream at a Chaffetz town hall meeting to hold Trump accountable will
not get his attention like 20 phone calls from lifelong salt-of-earth
conservative Republicans who donated and volunteered for each of his
campaigns.

Chaffetz -- and every other GOP politician elected to the
safest seats -- can be sure that for every loyal supporter who takes the time to
call his office with that message, there are at least 10 more who share their
views. Those polite inquiries are the dead-canaries in the coal-mines where
Trump's enablers have been toiling.

Those conservative
Republicans still exist. Perhaps some Democrats would prefer to wait for the
2018 mid-terms to flip the Senate or House, but Americans really need something
sooner than that.

Tyler DPrescott, AZ

May 17, 2017 9:10 a.m.

@NoNamesAccepted – “You've asked the wrong question and made
the wrong assertion.”

Let me explain why my question was
precisely the right one.

Since the Reagan Revolution, Democrats have
by and large engaged in civil discourse (a few nitwits on college campuses
notwithstanding) even as emboldened Republicans have ramped up their vitriol and
naked power grabs (e.g., impeach Clinton, obstruct Obama, steal a Supreme Court
seat, etc.).

You may not agree with the editorial columns in the NY
Times but they are simply part of the marketplace of ideas.

Now
finally after decades of “playing by the rules” (and attitude almost
totally absent on the Right) Democrats are beginning to wade into swamp, no
doubt driven by the election of arguably the most immature, morally flawed and
unfit person ever to be elected to high office.

So now for the
Right to decry our contempt and make calls for civility strikes me as an abusive
husband, after decades of beating his wife, pleading for domestic tranquility
the day after she finally decides to hit back.

You want to change our
toxic politics? Start by looking in the mirror.

JoeCapitalist2Orem, UT

May 17, 2017 8:27 a.m.

Daedalus, Stephen: "Simply put, America really needs Republicans and
conservatives to take back your party and power, asap."

And yet
not a word about Democrats and liberals taking back their party and power from
the radical leftists that have gained control over it. Just stick your head in
the sand and pretend that only the GOP has gone astray.

Both parties
need to keep the radical elements from their side from gaining too much
influence. So let's stop pretending that only the party we personally
oppose is to blame.

Daedalus, StephenARVADA, CO

May 16, 2017 6:58 p.m.

Trump is the antithesis of all that the Republican party and conservatives
espoused a mere 30 years ago.

But Trump did not simply just happen.

Trump is the final block placed by the amoral political opportunists
who have spent years cynically pushing, pulling and reshuffling conservative,
moral, and religious principles and ideas like blocks in a reckless and rowdy
game of Jenga, hooting and hollering as the tower starts to fall.

My
contempt for the 2017-era Republican party and 'conservatives' is not
aimed at the individual rank-and-file, but rather the misleading ideas used to
secure and retain those individuals' self-affiliation to an empty shell of
an ideology.

Perhaps surprisingly, I do not hold Trump in contempt as
a person. As a close relative to someone who exhibits similar symptoms of
destructive grandiosity, I have learned the hard way to recognize the humanity
within such a disordered mind, even while acknowledging the real harm she caused
to people I cared about. These are sad, lonely souls, deserving of pity and
compassion, but from a safe distance.

Simply put, America really
needs Republicans and conservatives to take back your party and power, asap.

NoNamesAcceptedSt. George, UT

May 16, 2017 5:28 p.m.

@Tyler D: "Even if we grant that mainstream media “leans left”
... why did we not get .... guys who would make Joseph Goebbels proud?

"This is what I find so troubling about today’s Right –
whatever they decry from the other side they give us its evil twin to the Nth
degree."

You've asked the wrong question and made the wrong
assertion.

The proper question (for both sides) is this: Do you want
to become what you despise in others?

The proper assertion is that
both sides ramp things up.

News media leans left. So the right got
talk radio.

Talk radio is a shouting fest. But it is mostly confined
to those who choose to listen. I rarely choose to listen. The public result of
talk radio is mostly people voting for more conservative candidates.

The left responds with outlandish and boorish behavior at town hall meetings
that prevents congressmen from having reasonable discourse with their
constituents.

Where does this end?

Both sides can always
point to something the other side did to justify their own bad behavior.

Which side will rein in their conduct? Who will stop the contempt and
accept that deep political disagreement doesn't make the other guy evil?

2 bitsCottonwood Heights, UT

May 16, 2017 2:38 p.m.

@wasatchcascade,#1. It doesn't matter what color the last President
was. They all deserve to not be treated with contempt (yes, even Trump and
Bush).

I disagreed with Obama and was disappointed he didn't
accomplish many of the things he promised in his campaigns, but I always said he
was a good man. Never had contempt for him as a person.

Does the
left have contempt for Trump? Did they have contempt for Bush over his
decisions (Iraq, etc)?

I'm sure there were some radicals who
grew contempt for Obama and other Presidents. That's why I say we all
need to learn the lesson in this letter.

Can you acknowledge that
your side needs to work on this? I've said I do. And Republicans
obviously do.

Blaming how you act today on how you think somebody
else acted before.. solves nothing.

Republicans can blame their
contempt for Obama on your contempt for Bush. And that has been blamed on
Republicans contempt for Clinton. That logic just guarantees the contempt goes
on. We have to break the cycle or each election it will get worse (with
partisans blaming their contempt on what happened to last President).

BTW... Media treated Obama with less contempt than Trump and Bush IMO.

Twin LightsLouisville, KY

May 16, 2017 2:32 p.m.

I agree wholeheartedly with the need for civility. I hope we practice it now.
I also hope we practiced it over the past 8 years. If not, perhaps we should
review our actions and resolve to do better.

Irony GuyBountiful, Utah

May 16, 2017 2:27 p.m.

All four of our congresspeople just voted to eliminate essential health benefits
for all Americans.

It is very difficult indeed to feel warm-hearted
toward such cold-hearted individuals.

On behalf of all Americans who
suffer from diabetes, cancer, heart disease, cystic fibrosis, autism, and other
"uninsurable" conditions, may I be forgiven for expressing a certain
"contempt" for our heartless Congress?

The True Open Minded MormonDraper, UT

May 16, 2017 2:21 p.m.

Dear Tyler: If you think Rush and Newt are to blame for the atmosphere of today,
you've spent too much time on Whiskey Row. Take a nice long drive up
Senator's Highway, at least up to Groom Creek, and let the breeze help you
with your thought process on this one.

I get it, the Left wants to
blame Rush for telling the truth about them but as the Wikileaks posts proved,
the DNC has always been corrupt and a lying machine to denigrate anyone and
anything that gets in the way.

ps, none of you who complain about
Rush, Fox News etc even listen/watch them.pss, I don't either!

JoeCapitalist2Orem, UT

May 16, 2017 2:07 p.m.

Impartial7: "I remember when that contempt started. It was when Rush
Limbaugh ..."

No. It did not start there. It didn't start
with Obama, Bush, Clinton, or Reagan either. Civil discord and rhetoric has been
around since before the start of our republic. You can pretend all you want that
'the other side started it' but until both sides decide to tone it
down, it will only get worse.

In the last election, I voted for the
candidate that I considered the 'less of two evils'. Lots of other
people decided that Hillary was somehow more acceptable. While I disagree with
their vote, I respect their right to cast it. Looking at Trump, I can understand
why many people don't like him even if I can't understand the
hyperbolic hatred many have towards him. I don't think that the only
possible reason someone could have voted for Hillary is because they must be
racist, sexist, evil, and/or stupid either.

It would be nice if more
people on the left would think the same thing about me and my vote.

Tyler DPrescott, AZ

May 16, 2017 1:59 p.m.

@NoNamesAccepted – “But prior to talk radio, cable TV, and the
Internet, what voice did conservative views have? The big networks have leaned
leftward since at least the days of Walter Cronkite.”

Even if
we grant that mainstream media “leans left” (which is very different
than claiming the media is Leftist) why did we not get new media that just
“leans right” rather than guys who would make Joseph Goebbels
proud?

This is what I find so troubling about today’s Right
– whatever they decry from the other side they give us its evil twin to
the Nth degree.

Hillary Clinton is a liar? Let’s elect the most
prolific liar in the history of the Republic.

Where are the
Republicans who, when they identify a vice among their opponents, turn to the
corresponding virtue as an antidote instead of embracing that same vice and
giving it a steroid injection?

2 bitsCottonwood Heights, UT

May 16, 2017 1:41 p.m.

RE: "Ideas and the expression of those ideas can and should be treated with
contempt, when those ideas deserve it"...---Treat the idea with
contempt (if you must) but not the person. That's something you do
frequently. Treat the person with the idea with contempt. That's
wrong.

When you start grouping people, and treating them all with
contempt (as we have seen in some bitterly contentious comments about people who
voted for Trump)... you are on the wrong track.

Treat the idea with
contempt if you must, but not the person. And don't apply your contempt to
whole groups, assuming they fit your stereotypes for their "Type" and
assuming you know what they think or feel (because you have a convenient
stereotype for them).

People are not bad. Some ideas are bad.

Keep your contempt to the idea.. Not the people. Is my suggestion.

Do you deny some people have contempt for people because they voted for
Chaffetz, or Trump? I know for a fact it happens. They have contempt for the
person. Because they voted wrong.

That's the point.

wasatchcascade,

May 16, 2017 1:16 p.m.

Boyd, at it again, from his Sutherland stronghold, preaching the religion of
conservatism but bathing it in the balm of cooperation as an antidote to
contempt? America had a black president for 8 years, and while many could
contest is ideology and views, his personal manner and his family were deemed
respectful - and yet the right, with great gusto offered non-stop contempt
toward the man. And now we have a POTUS who has in his pocket at times a
crassness, vulgarity, impulsiveness and unspeakable lapse of judgment. But we,
the citizenry are to keep our quiet, show restraint all the while contempt is a
trigger for the other side (another past president). Respect, acceptance,
flexibility, adaptability and attempt at understanding are laudatory mindsets I
imagine, and a sense of "control" when we are upset. But tossing out
contempt in the current national and state climate - well, one would have to
fire the state Republican chair and how many other politicos, from the Governor
to Senator Hatch and on down. Oh yes, tethering conservatism to theology and
then quiet & a pause; until the side starts up their engines, and the
volcanos roar?

LagomorphSalt Lake City, UT

May 16, 2017 12:43 p.m.

One imagines that Mr. Matheson recently visited his attic, found that cardboard
box with the embossed faux leather finish, undid the brass clasp to open the
hinged lid, and withdrew a 7-inch vinyl disk that he then took to his den and
placed on the vintage turntable at a brisk 45 rpm. From the speakers came the
aspirational voices of Jim and Cathy Post of Friend & Lover singing
“Reach Out of the Darkness.” It would indeed be so groovy now if we
could sit down with people we did not care for, like longshoremen, perhaps, and
talk about things that were on our mind and find that they were friends of ours.
And yet “Reach Out of the Darkness” is generally derided by the
sophisticated left as naÏve nostalgia. Meanwhile, the right, which
eschewed hippiedom and hewed to church camp, has somehow, oddly, picked
“Kumbayah” to be the metaphor of choice for the kind of cooperative
civility they disdain. "Kumbayah" is now a putdown. Maybe a mutually
agreeable middle ground can be found in the Youngbloods and “Get
Together”?

Can we try to love one another? Right now would be
good.

HSTuckerHolladay, UT

May 16, 2017 12:43 p.m.

Thank you, Mr. Matheson. Sadly, civility has become a conservative value, no
longer revered by popular culture. You're preaching to the choir.

With luck, those who value civility will prioritize that virtue above
"resistance" to those who disagree.

jeanie orem, UT

May 16, 2017 11:51 a.m.

"This is a thinly veiled attempt at inoculating 'conservative'
ideas and those who promulgate them from criticism."

No,
it's not.

"Ideas and the expression of those ideas can and
should be treated with contempt, when those ideas deserve it."

Who gets to decide what ideas deserve it? Who has the authority for the final
say? Not you or me.

"...they should be ready for that idea to be
challenged, even ridiculed..."

Why ridiculed? Why not just
challenged?

As the article pointed out, it takes very little effort
to ridicule and a lot more thought and self-discipline to present your own
counter arguments.

No minds are changed through second grade
behavior, but people can be persuaded with clear arguments.

NoNamesAcceptedSt. George, UT

May 16, 2017 11:43 a.m.

Once again, too many of the comments prove the thesis of the article. Nothing
in this article should be at all disagreeable to anyone regardless of political
ideology. But because the author works for a generally right-leaning think tank
(though not grassroots conservative on issues like enforcing immigration),
certain voices not only dismiss the words, but attack them.

Some who
don't attack the thesis entirely, attempt to dismiss it as not being valid
because it wasn't written while Obama was president. Many, as much as
justify their own contempt toward others. The thesis of the article is proved
as liberal posters demonstrate contempt for the author and all conservative
viewpoints. A couple of conservative posters return the contempt for their
liberal neighbors.

It is fine to disagree. The problem is viewing
another human being as less than because of that disagreement.

Would
it be too much to ask that we view conservatives as hard working decent people
rather than as greedy? And that we view liberals as decent, caring people who
want a just, peaceful world, rather than as lazy, couvetous, parasites?

NoNamesAcceptedSt. George, UT

May 16, 2017 11:35 a.m.

It is easy for the left to point to talk radio as some milepost change in
society. I don't care for the tone myself.

But prior to talk
radio, cable TV, and the Internet, what voice did conservative views have? The
big networks have leaned leftward since at least the days of Walter Cronkite.
NPR always has.

Some leftists will justify terrorism against Israel
from Palestine because of the difference in power, but fail to consider that for
a couple of decades--from the sexual revolution in the 60s through the
80s--conservatives in America had no media voice while the left controlled pop
culture and media. No, that does not justify even incivility, and certainly not
violence. But it does lead to pent up frustration.

I suspect that
too many on the left (and the right), however, are upset not with how the right
(or left) expresses itself but more fundamentally are very unhappy that such
differing views continue to exist at all.

Trump is no more offensive
in personal conduct than was JFK, LBJ, Nixon, or Bill Clinton; just more honest
about it. But his election stalled the march toward endless liberalism. It
reminded the left that the right still exists.

Daedalus, StephenARVADA, CO

May 16, 2017 11:16 a.m.

This is a thinly veiled attempt at inoculating 'conservative' ideas
and those who promulgate them from criticism.

Remember the trope
'hate the sin, love the sinner'?

The same applies here.

Ideas and the expression of those ideas can and should be treated with
contempt, when those ideas deserve it.

Does the individual
expressing those ideas deserve to treated with contempt?

No, not if
he or she is expressing a personal opinion for no other reason than giving voice
to what they sincerely believe. But they should be ready for that idea to be
challenged, even ridiculed, in the free-wheeling marketplace of ideas, without
seeking shelter in playing the victim.

But paid pundits, think-tank
executives, and elected officials can and should be personally regarded with
contempt if they propagate contemptible ideas on behalf of their benefactors, in
full knowledge of the purpose and effect of those words, ideas, and policies.

So...sorry Mr. Matheson, you are not off the hook. Nice try though.

Tyler DPrescott, AZ

May 16, 2017 10:50 a.m.

@The True Open Minded Mormon – “There is zero self-reflection by any
of the Liberal/Democrat/Progressive individuals who post on these
pages.”

I agree nice article.

Though your
comment above brought to mind the Parable of the Mote and the Beam.

Certainly there’s blame to go around, but Impartial7 is right in
suggesting that the poisoning of our politics went to a whole new level with
talk radio and politicians like Newt Gingrich (who now seen as not aggressive
enough by today’s alt-right).

That said, the Left has their
own demons smug condescension being chief among them.

VanceoneProvo, UT

May 16, 2017 10:51 a.m.

Note the leftists all singing from the same book : "It's really the
right that is the hateful speech promotors! They disagreed with Obama, which
was racist and sexist to not agree with our president! It's unpatriotic,
except when we do it! Bushitler!"

The left is now claiming that
they have the right to censor speech, because it's "Hate speech".
Every single leftist in this thread who is saying the right started it under
Obama also claims that the government should silence "hate speech." And
what is hate speech? Why, whatever they, the left, says is hate speech.
Calling all Christians "Homophobic bigots who should be forcibly
silenced/squelched" is not hate speech, of course. Saying "I disagree
with Obama" is irrefutable evidence you are a racist and have forfeited all
your rights as a US Citizen.

While it may be true that there is some
overwrought language on the right, it pales to the left's current position:
"You are guilty of wrong-thought and wrong-speech and therefore we shall
beat you until you change your mind!"

The True Open Minded MormonDraper, UT

May 16, 2017 10:24 a.m.

Impartial7 is the perfect example of what Boyd is referencing. There is zero
self-reflection by any of the Liberal/Democrat/Progressive individuals who post
on these pages.

Attack...attack...attack

Nice post Boyd.

Fred44Salt Lake City, Utah

May 16, 2017 10:21 a.m.

2 Bits,

Don't you think this would have been a little more
credible if the editorial had been written back in October when Donald Trump was
insulting everyone he disagreed with or 5-6 years ago when republicans led by
Limbaugh, Hannity and the gang were trashing President Obama and Hillary
Clinton? Timing is everything, and for the far right Sutherland Institute to
now see this as a problem after their guy got into the White House by trashing
everyone is a bit disingenuous don't you think?

VanceoneProvo, UT

May 16, 2017 10:09 a.m.

And yet, Impartial7, you are 100% comfortable calling people "Bigots"
and "haters" and "Racists" and "sexists" and
"theocrats" full of "hate speech" whenever they disagree with
you. And your entire party is currently promoting "Your speech is violence,
and our violence is merely speech." The left thinks it is okay to maim and
murder people because they don't like what some people say.

Witness the leftist who just poisoned the founder of JihadWatch in Iceland (to
cheers and praise from your side, naturally). The riots at Berkeley and many
other places. The left's response? crickets, or else praise and "Of
course hate speech shouldn't be tolerated! Naturally, we on the left
define what is hate speech...."

Don't pretend that the left
is some paragon of virtue under assault by those evil "reichwingers" the
left is so fond of. It's rather the opposite: people on the right are
actually under assault--physical harm-- from you and your side. And you claim
that it is the right who is intolerant?

Prometheus PlatypusOrem, UT

May 16, 2017 10:06 a.m.

We have a President who is a huge part of the new illiteracy along with those
who get their information from radio and TV.

This, then, is the new
illiteracy, the illiteracy of those who can read but don't. [...] This new
illiteracy is more pernicious than the old, because unlike the old illiteracy it
does not debar its victims from power and influence, although like the old
illiteracy it disqualifies them for it. Those long-dead men and women who
learned to read so that they might read the Bible and John Bunyan would tell us
that pride is the greatest of all sins, the father of sin. And the victims of
the new illiteracy are proud of it. If you don't believe me, talk to them
and see with what pride they trumpet their utter ignorance of any book you care
to name.Gene Wolfe

There You Go AgainSt George, UT

May 16, 2017 10:03 a.m.

This op-ed would be believable if it had come during the 8 years President Obama
was the POTUS.

The person who was elected to be the POTUS made a
cottage industry of questioning President Obama's birth certificate.

Mrs. Obama was referred to as an Ape in Heels.

Not a word
about toning down comments while President Obama was in office.

Now
we read/hear a call to tone down our dialogue?

Boyd in Provo, 00

May 16, 2017 9:25 a.m.

This is a very timely and well written article of what we are facing as a people
in today's world. I agree with "jeanie from orem" that we may
strongly disagree but we still see value in each other.

We have all
gone through the worst presidential election cycle in years but I believe it is
time for all of us to take a deep breath and start acting civil to one another
again. We have done it in the past and we can do it again.

2 bitsCottonwood Heights, UT

May 16, 2017 9:07 a.m.

I actually agree with everything he said. I wonder what my liberal friends who
attack people (especially Republicans in general) with such contempt and bad
stereotypes, feel about what he said about contempt.

I know my
Democrat friends and Liberal Friends and Progressive friends are just as
"good" as I am. But I don't get the same feeling back from them.
They seem to feel superior, and full of contempt for people who don't agree
with them (politically).

We could all learn from what he said in his
letter. Everybody.

marxistSalt Lake City, UT

May 16, 2017 9:08 a.m.

"In our modern media world, it is much easier to have contempt for those who
disagree with us than it is to engage in meaningful dialogue. "

True enough. But to have "meaningful dialogue" requires people know
something. They have to bring knowledge, theory and concepts to the debate.
Often we lack these so we just attach ourselves to a belief which feeds our
egos, and shout it.

Some attribute things mistakenly to me because of
my handle "marxist." I so label myself for one reason only, and that is
to get Marx's rich and huge volume of theory into mainstream economics.
But my effort is handicapped because most people in our community literally
don't know who Marx was.

This makes "meaningful
dialogue" almost impossible in these areas important to me.

jeanie orem, UT

May 16, 2017 8:51 a.m.

Truly, all political parties are guilty of this contempt. Pointing fingers
solves nothing because for every accusation there is a counter one - keeping us
all angry and feeling victimized.

"When they go low, we go
high" applies to all or we continue to be part of the problem regardless of
our political beliefs.

It has to be that we can disagree, even
strongly, without contempt or we are lost.

AbeilleWest Haven, UT

May 16, 2017 8:18 a.m.

I know that's how you feel, Impartial7. Others see it differently. But all
that isn't the question. The question is, what are you going to do about it
now? You have a choice - continue to be angry and find reasons and excuses why
demeaning another is okay, or take a chance and talk with others who don't
share your opinion. A quote attributed to Aristotle says, "It is the mark of
an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
Being aware of the thoughts of others can allow us to make better policy, better
laws, and results in treating everyone better - as equals. Without this,
we're back to treating the opposition poorly and making excuses why
that's okay.

stevo123Driggs, ID

May 16, 2017 7:59 a.m.

Mr.Matheson, The American Enterprise Institute and the Sutherland Institute do
not have me and my family's interest in mind. Do not mistake opposition
for uncivil behavior.

HutteriteAmerican Fork, UT

May 16, 2017 7:52 a.m.

It is not contemptuous, however, to discuss when we find someone working on our
behalf displays behaviour that is incompetent, immature or even dangerous or
treasonous. Those are qualities we see in them, and perhaps they must be
dealt with.

Impartial7DRAPER, UT

May 16, 2017 6:53 a.m.

"“More than we have an anger problem in American politics, we have a
contempt problem in American politics.”

I remember when that
contempt started. It was when Rush Limbaugh gained national attention for his
contemptuous radio program. Followed by Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck, etc.
Democrats tried decorum in response but got shouted down at every tur. The
Sutherland institute isn't exactly a model of civility, either.

jeanie orem, UT

May 16, 2017 6:53 a.m.

This is a great article!

"If I feel that my opponent is utterly
worthless, it is easier for me to make ranting personal attacks rather than
reasoned arguments."

What a difference we would all feel in this
country if our foundational belief were that while we may strongly disagree, we
still see value in each other.